Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

14 May 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs:    Today    Yesterday      May 12 (Mon)      May 11 (Sun)      May 10 (Sat)     More... Media   Organisations   Biography   Society   Web   Games   Science   Arts   Places   Indiscern.  Not-Sorted

Purge server cache

Teresa Harding (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Just a year ago, this page was redirected following an AfD discussion due to lack of WP:GNG-qualifying coverage and a failure to pass WP:NPOL. The page has been recreated at much greater length but I am not seeing the kind of WP:SIGCOV we need to see. To the extent there is any secondary coverage here, it is either local coverage that is limited to her role as mayor or a mayoral candidate ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]) or WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS in WP:ROUTINE election coverage ([7], [8]). I am concerned that this article also fails WP:NOT by constituting WP:OR, considering the extensive use of WP:PRIMARYSOURCEs, including official bios or statements ([9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]), primary source election results ([17], [18], [19]), and the subject's own Facebook posts ([20], [21], [22]). There is also a high likelihood of WP:SYNTH given the page creator's use of several sources that do not even mention Harding ([23], [24], [25], [26], [27]). I see no warrant for a standalone page here and seek a fresh consensus for a redirect to List of mayors of Ipswich, Queensland. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:42, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Australia. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:42, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Manners, Marquess of Granby (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTGENEALOGY; no WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:25, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Royalty and nobility, and United Kingdom. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:25, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charles S. Dorion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Mainly notability concerns per WP:ARTIST, as well as some ambiguity over whether all sources refer to the same individual. See talk page discussion for more details. Pineapple Storage (talk) 12:11, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Visual arts. Pineapple Storage (talk) 12:11, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chromebook challenge (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTNEWS Launchballer 09:58, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:08, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. If this topic still has coverage in news or scholarly media a year from now (ha!) we can re-create the article. We don't need to index every passing fad (note how every single source is from the past week). WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 11:00, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lanch, I'm pretty sure you're supposed to give a reason in your nomination. Ameright?

Also, comitting arson for Tiktok views would still probably be a talking point (but more minor) in 7 months. Thegoofhere (talk) 11:40, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: No evidence this flash in the pan social media fad passes WP:NEVENT; we would need to see WP:SUSTAINED coverage. And WP:NOTNEWS, while not effusive, is a valid deletion rationale since WP:NOT is the second part of the two-part WP:GNG test. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:25, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

just keep it on bro 166.109.26.101 (talk) 14:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

istg there are undocumented terrorists out there and your worried about some stupid article of a true challenge 166.109.26.101 (talk) 14:06, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Thurii (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Found while browsing Wikipedia:Database reports/Forgotten articles. Cannot find any books or sources that mention this supposed battle that predate the creation of this article in 2007. The only "citations" this article has are incomplete citations which just say a book title and nothing else. No authors, no year of publishing, no ISBN, nothing. And the "source" titles are extremely vague, like "History of Rome" or "Antiquity".

(Note: I know there were actual battles between Tarantos and ancient Rome for control of the area, but I cannot find evidence that "Battle of Thurii" was one of those battles, or that there was any "naval battle" for the region.) ApexParagon (talk) 00:12, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Greece, and Italy. Shellwood (talk) 00:40, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: The editor who created this stub seems to have been inactive on Wikipedia since 2013, but nothing on his/her talk page suggests that it was created as a hoax (I was looking for warnings of various sorts). Given that the part about Thurii is only a single sentence, while the rest concerns Rome's conflict with Tarentum, I wonder if perhaps the editor was confused about the sequence of events—perhaps including the dates. My first thought was to check the history of the cities in the Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, and see if it mentioned something similar to a battle at this time. Under "Tarentum", at p. 1097, if you scroll down the first column there's a description of Rome and Tarentum coming into conflict over Thurii, though this is supposed to have occurred in 302 BC, while the Tarentines didn't call in Pyrrhus until 281, when the Romans declared war on Tarentum.

This sounds like what the article creator had in mind, but unless the description is in error—which is possible, though it's hard to see "302" as a typo for "282" under "Tarentum"—the editor might have been confused by a less precise description such as the corresponding passage under "Thurii", top of the first column on p. 1193. I believe both are citing Appian's Samnite Wars, though additional sources are cited in "Tarentum" that might also shed light on this. I agree that the existing citations for this article are not very helpful, but thankfully knowing what sources describe the conflicts may help sort out whether there's enough here to salvage (at the very least, it can probably be merged under Thurii, Tarentum, and Pyrrhus, which would technically not be a deletion).

I expect Broughton can also be cited. I did not resort to PW, because wading through pages of densely-annotated German that I have to translate by retyping passages that I think are relevant on Google can be quite time-consuming! Not sure where else I would look besides the Greek and Roman authors cited in the DGRG, but perhaps someone else has some ideas on that. In any case, I think we can conclude that the article is not a hoax, but it might not be focused on its purported subject—Thurii—and might be better off mentioned in other articles than as a stand-alone one. P Aculeius (talk) 14:28, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 09:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...Sings Modern Talking: Let's Talk About Love (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of this album passing WP:NALBUM, charting, or receiving critical responses. A copy of this mainspace version is at the draftspace, so this looks more like a copy-and-paste move. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:46, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Music, and Germany. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:46, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• draftify for now. Given that the previous release did chart at number 5 in Germany, this one might as well chart, but we don't know. Alternatively these 6 past and future releases could just have one article under the title "Magic". Bedivere (talk) 16:14, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Now that it's reached number 5 in the German charts I think it's fine to keep Bedivere (talk) 15:42, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Bedivere Citation, please? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:56, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  https://www.offiziellecharts.de/charts/album Bedivere (talk) 16:11, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 10:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:33, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect - Redirect with history to Thomas Anders, but do not delete. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:56, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Jax 0677 It now passes WP:NALBUM as it charted at #5 in the German charts. Bedivere (talk) 00:44, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Thomas Anders#Discography. Charting in and of itself does not make the album notable. Chart positions can simply be noted at the target page. There is no other indication of significant coverage. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:42, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  NALBUM states: "Specific to recordings, a recording may be notable if it meets at least one of these criteria: 2. The recording has appeared on any country's national music chart." This album appeared in three national charts.

  And there are some German language sources which cover this album in particular, from reputable sources. I'm not proficient at that language so I can't add them, but someone hopefully will. Bedivere (talk) 22:56, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Laut.de [28] Schlagerprofis (Widely cited in German Wiki and some articles here) [29] --Bedivere (talk) 23:00, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Bedivere. They do have a point. Some of the other albums seem to have their own page too. Ramos1990 (talk) 04:48, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Response on the national charts position?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 09:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of world champions in WWE born outside the United States (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Seems to be original research and fancruft. BinaryBrainBug (talk) 08:34, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and Wrestling. BinaryBrainBug (talk) 08:34, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because of the same reason as bundle AFD:

List of WWE male wrestlers born outside the United States (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

List of NJPW male wrestlers born outside Japan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

List of WWE female wrestlers born outside the United States (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

BinaryBrainBug (talk) 09:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:07, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Wall (guitarist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Musician from non-notable band. Passing mentions in local press as a part of his band. Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Rift (talk) 08:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Michigan. Shellwood (talk) 10:09, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aliens Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. As of now, the page is a WP:PROMO. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:03, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Andhra Pradesh. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:03, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: per nominator rationale. Chronos.Zx (talk) 10:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

VPR Mining Infra Private Ltd (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. Furthermore, the WP:BEFORE check has failed. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:00, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Andhra Pradesh. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:00, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SQL Star (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. Furthermore, the WP:BEFORE check has failed and not a WP:LISTED company, as it claims on the page. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:59, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Andhra Pradesh. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:59, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KSK Energy Ventures (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. Furthermore, the WP:BEFORE check has failed. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:55, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Andhra Pradesh. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:55, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Synergy Advertising Pakistan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Sources are PR sponsored articles disguising as WP:RS Mekomo (talk) 07:55, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:11, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising and Companies. Shellwood (talk) 10:07, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Would a redirect to Synergy Group be a possible ATD? – The Grid (talk) 12:40, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aparna Enterprises (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. Furthermore, the WP:BEFORE check has failed. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:53, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:53, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Telangana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:12, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keka HR (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. Furthermore, the WP:BEFORE check has failed. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:50, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:50, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Telangana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:13, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cantabil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources, whether on or off Wikipedia, should be viewed with caution, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI. Apart from that, activities like revenue targets, profit/financial reporting, turnover news, capacity expansion news etc., are merely routine coverage WP:ROUTINE, regardless of where they are published. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:48, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:48, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:14, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:14, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Integrated Women and Youth Empowerment Centre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails all notability guidelines. Mekomo (talk) 07:15, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Nigeria. Kpgjhpjm 07:19, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kirsten Jepsen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested draftification, so here we are. (Why not just let it stay in draft space?) It was draftified as only relying on database sources, and was readded with no valid sources. The only sources are a database and two instances of her name appearing in lists. These are nowhere near significant coverage, cf. WP:SPORTCRIT: "All sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources". I could find no other Danish sources in a WP:BEFORE (a language I can read and speak). I'm by no means opposed to it being draftified again, but it then has to go through the AFC process, I think. Geschichte (talk) 05:27, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Denmark. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Since the draft submission process was not respected. Svartner (talk) 12:33, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I translated this article from Spanish before it was unilaterally moved to draftspace. I added more references and moved it back. Moondragon21 (talk) 15:10, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have added Danish language sources. Moondragon21 (talk) 14:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They too just mention her name among many Geschichte (talk) 17:49, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is because the medals were won in team events. Moondragon21 (talk) 18:03, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the policy excerpt above. They need individual coverage about their person. Geschichte (talk) 22:02, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The policy does not specifically cover rowing making it somewhat confusing. Compared to other pages in Category:Danish female rowers this article is better sourced so what is the standard? Moondragon21 (talk) 23:04, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The policy covers any and all sports. Regardless of sport, people need individual coverage about their person to have an article. Without that, it's not well sourced - in fact, having one reference with individual coverage about their person is the minimum standard. Geschichte (talk) 04:52, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I only translated the article believing that a medal winning world champion in rowing was notable. Moondragon21 (talk) 14:38, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No harm done, and as I said in the nomination, I am willing to move it back into draft space. Such a medalist "should" be notable, but then again, it's not our job to decide that, but rather the abundance of in-depth sources... Geschichte (talk) 07:04, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is fine. Would AFC be preferred to using Wikipedia:CXT? Moondragon21 (talk) 19:58, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to 2003 World Rowing Championships. Not enough coverage for stand alone page. Ramos1990 (talk) 05:00, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: commenters seem split between redirecting as an ATD and deleting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 07:06, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Not enough significant coverage. Angryapathy (talk) 13:34, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Humming Airways (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing to satisfy WP:GNG. Lack of significant coverage in reliable and secondary sources. WP:TOOSOON also. Bakhtar40 (talk) 04:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Aviation, and Argentina. Bakhtar40 (talk) 04:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Moderate Keep It might be seen as WP:TOOSOON but has some coverage in the media WP:BTMBS. [30] [31] [32] [33] [34]. There are many more websites and I am not sure which ones are actually reliable but some are reliable Argentinian news websites. HilssaMansen19 (talk) 14:44, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@HilssaMansen19, None of the sources you gave are reliable. All of them look like paid articles. Bakhtar40 (talk) 06:28, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – Passes in WP:NCORP. Svartner (talk) 12:11, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Svartner, On which ground it passes WP:NCORP. Let's talk about the references. Bakhtar40 (talk) 06:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I'll try to summarize the sources:
  • [1]. Infobae appears to be significant coverage, though there is no byline on this article.
  • [2]. Humming Airways published by the subject itself, does not contribute to notability.
  • [3]. Aviacion News this is an interview with the founders, does not contribute to notability.
  • [4]. Aviacionline reads as... very promotional.
  • [5]. Villamaria Vivo this provides the reader with a helpful link to purchase an inexpensive flight. I would say this is not independent.
  • [6] InfoGEI Independent, but not significant coverage; just describes the airline's first flight in 4 sentences.
  • [7] Promociones Aereas Promotional website that provides timetables and prices for booking a flight. Not significant, independent coverage.
  • [8] Info Viajera This is just a press release with 4 sentences of introduction. Not significant, independent coverage.
• Based on this I lean delete as the sources in the article do not demonstrate significant, independent coverage from reliable sources. -- Reconrabbit 19:20, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I'm not sure about the reliability of HilssaMansen19's sources, but I think the Aviacion News interview has enough to count towards notability per Wikipedia:Interviews#Notability and isn't the only coverage there. Aviacionline reads as enthusiastic which tracks with that part of the world and does not mean promotional, and isn't the only coverage from them There is also ch-aviation. There is also Perfil, infobae, and La Nacion. Enough for WP:THREE. DCsansei (talk) 06:18, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The company is too young and has not reached much notability yet. It seems like it was set up to promote the new company. Ramos1990 (talk) 04:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 06:58, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Frances Schumann Howell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The one element of sigcov I could find on a BEFORE search is Molina's article (cited in the wiki article already). Not really enough by itself to establish GNG. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 06:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Fashion. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 06:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Artists, Authors, California, and Michigan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Austral Launch Vehicle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Alright -- this article does have some reliable sources, including TheConversation. The issues here are this: this is an orphaned article, and this vehicle is a concept without WP:SIGCOV. See: it doesn't exist in its final form/ yet. As it doesn't really exist yet, WP:TOOSOON, also seems a bit like it violates WP:NOTPROMO. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:28, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Science, Technology, Spaceflight, and Australia. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:28, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as I said in the afd for Marie-Rose Tessier I can't take your argument seriously when you admit you think the sources are reliable in your original rationale also just because it is not complete doesnt mean it isn't ready for an article especially since as you have already admitted there are sources that cover it and how can it be promotional if the sources are reliable? Scooby453w (talk) WP:SOCKSTRIKE. ✗plicit 04:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RS is not the end all be all. Just because something has been covered in a reliable source once does not mean that it is Wikipedia worthy; we also have WP:SIGCOV, meaning that articles need to have significant coverage. That pairs with coverage in reliable sources; this article has one reference to TheConversation; no sigcov in reliable sources. Next, there is WP:SUSTAINED. The coverage needs to be continuing and sustained; the last coverage of this subject was about a decade ago, and there hasn't been anything of note since. Fails that. All in all, clear deletion, unless a Wikipedian can find more recent coverage in reliable sources.AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 22:02, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is not temporary jusf because it hasn't been in a source in a decade doesnt mean it should be deleted the 3 sources span multiple months its not like its something that shows up once on the morning news Scooby453w (talk) 22:23, 30 April 2025 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE. ✗plicit 04:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is one reliable source from TEN years ago, in TheConversation. Not enough reliable, independent sources. Finally, it doesn't appear that this project has made any noises for almost ten years, and the final product likely doesn't exist. If you find any more sources, please let me know. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:53, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that we could do a Merge with Australian Space Agency. The total content makes for about one paragraph or so, but it is still of note. Hal Nordmann (talk) 10:53, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge: The sources on ALV I’ve come across, including Springer papers by researchers from the University of Queensland and Heliaq Advanced Engineering [35], [36], are reliable but not independent, so they don’t satisfy WP:GNG. That said, they confirm ALV’s role in Australia’s aerospace research history. A merge into Australian Space Agency would retain this material in a more appropriate context, per WP:PRESERVE. HerBauhaus (talk) 12:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more support for merge as ATD?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:47, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Fails WP:GNG and falls foul of WP:CRYSTAL:Wikipedia is not a collection of product announcements. As AnonymousScholar49 notes, this is a project that appears to have been on the backburner for about a decade, having received no independent SIGCOV in that entire period.

I would be happy with a merge, but is Australian Space Agency really the best place? None of the sources I'm seeing even make mention of the ASA, and I don't see a neat place to fit information on this project into the article as it currently exists. Maybe reusable launch vehicle would be a better merge destination? Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 09:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 06:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tianjin Fourth Central Hospital (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Similar to the case of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine First Affiliated Hospital, this hospital also appears to fail WP:GNG. GTrang (talk) 03:58, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Medicine, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:16, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There is no way a 95-year-old, 880-bed hospital affiliated to (possibly) the best medical university in China is not notable. I'm not going to do a proper source search just this moment, but I will provide references for my claims: [37][38]. Toadspike [Talk] 00:02, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep.This hospital is classified as a Grade A Tertiary Hospital, which means it is one of the highest-level hospitals officially accredited by the Chinese government. It is a non-profit public institution, not commercially operated, and treats tens of thousands of patients annually. Frankly speaking, one reason I focus on writing entries about large public hospitals is to help prevent misleading commercial promotion by smaller private hospitals. The references cited are based on the most authoritative and professional data sources available regarding local healthcare conditions. Has the proposer fulfilled their responsibility in reviewing this content seriously? Have they conducted any academic searches or reviewed relevant literature? I was able to retrieve numerous academic papers through Google Scholar. Or is the proposer simply speculating based on personal unfamiliarity? Such an attitude is neither friendly nor consistent with the rigor and responsibility that this task requires.--Amazingloong (talk) 15:48, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 06:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fintilect (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable software company. Routine coverage like M&As, renaming, investments, are not enough to pass WP:CORPDEPTH. UPE history is another issue. Gheus (talk) 09:52, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 10:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Software, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep after article rescue work (again). Any recent UPE work (if that's what it was) had already been reverted by the nominator. Restore former material of historical interest, e.g. OS/2 software as highlighted in the previous AFD. – Fayenatic London 13:39, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I haven't found anything outside of primary sources and routine business announcements. Many sources are "fintech" focused and I tend to view such sources with the same skepticism as crypto focused sites. I haven't found much in the way of notability for the previous iterations of the company either. The sources on the historic article don't seem to meet reliability or notability requirements either. The old page seems like a relic of a more lenient era of wikipedia. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 21:59, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Is not notable and does not have wide coverage in RS. Reads like a promotion. Ramos1990 (talk) 00:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 06:05, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tannery Garden, Basirhat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:GEOLAND only presumes notability for the legally recognized city of Basirhat, not the informally defined Tannery Garden neighborhood. Citing the Bharat Sevashram Sangha website's listing of its address cannot support the claim that the area is famous for that group's presence. Listing the post office pin code does not establish notability because all sufficiently small areas have a single postal code. The Basirhat Police website failed to load, but it seems to only establish the neighborhood's existence, rather than providing significant coverage of the neighborhood as a distinct entity. The claimed 2025 population and literacy rate are made without citation, which is particularly confusing because the 2025 census of India remains indefinitely postponed, while the 2011 census of India only measured Basirhat as a whole, not at the neighborhood level. ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬) 05:59, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:10, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Xiaobailou station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't satisfy WP:N and the only source is WP:PRIMARY DankPedia (talk) 05:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and China. DankPedia (talk) 05:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:10, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Line 1 (Tianjin Metro) as the line serving the station, as a WP:ATD-R. S5A-0043🚎^{(Leave a message here)} 08:39, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sportsport.ba (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not a notable site. No significant coverage cited or available. The only significant coverage is for the football award that the site organized for some years; it might be reasonable to redirect to that article, Idol Nacije. — Moriwen (talk) 05:26, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Websites, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. — Moriwen (talk) 05:26, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Basketball, Football, Handball, and Martial arts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Unclear, but there are some notes on the web it might be under the Bridgepoint Group. With the rather notable and wealthy Sébastien Rohart (who has no article) behind it. However it's a little unclear. WP:INHERENTWEB may apply for deletion. However I am just going to stick to an Abstain for a non-consensus vote as the website has 300,000k daily visitors. Govvy (talk) 11:11, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is a non-notable website. Angryapathy (talk) 13:38, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reiven Bulado (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article on Filipino actor Reiven Bulado was created thirteen years ago by an editor with a conflict of interest. It is filled with unsourced trivia/fluff/gossip, such as He is a locally well-known guy who calls his male friends, "Paps", and He is the heir of some family-owned farmlands and commercial fish ponds.

The only two sources cited are 1) a film review that does not mention Bulado, and 2) WP:IMDB. I see two books and another review on Panaghoy sa Suba that contain his name, but they do not provide significant coverage of Bulado – he is only listed as part of the cast. Bulado fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Iiii I I I (talk) 04:22, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Philippines. Iiii I I I (talk) 04:22, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Edit: Found a source in the Philippine Daily Inquirer where he was (barely) interviewed, but this is still not sigcov. --Iiii I I I (talk) 07:12, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

National Council on Compensation Insurance (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There are no references at all to this insurance-related industry-funded company in Florida. FeralOink (talk) 01:35, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Business. FeralOink (talk) 01:35, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, United States of America, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:19, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep this article needs to be improved and sourced (If I have time I will do those things later,) but this article has reliable sources and the subject is notable. After all, notability is based off of the existence of sources, not just the ones in the article. It's also a non-profit, not really a company. Here we go: [40][41][42][43][44][45] (Primary, non independent source), [46][47][48][49][50][51]. In essence, this is a data collection non profit for the insurance industry, and its relatively influential and important. Clearly passes the WP:GNG and the WP:NORG guidelines. In the future, please conduct an adequate WP:BEFORE check. --AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 03:22, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - AnonymousScholar49 is correct, that there exist some good sources that someone could add to the article, e.g. US Bureau of Labor Statistics and Insurance Journal are legit. As for this being a non-profit, I don't know about that. It is described as "a U.S. insurance rating and data collection bureau specializing in workers' compensation. Operating with a not-for-profit philosophy and owned by its member insurers...". I'm not sure why this is important but merely responding to Anon.--FeralOink (talk) 21:41, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:59, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed Ali Al-Malky (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod. No significant third party coverage. Olympians.sa appears to be a primary source of the Saudi OIympic federation, in any case it seems just to a database listing of athletes. Those wanting to keep must show evidence of indepth third party sourcing. LibStar (talk) 00:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Saudi Arabia. LibStar (talk) 00:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Finding sources for these types of athletes takes significant time and effort. I meant to only add the Arabic name I found as a note (which differs from Olympedia's Arabic name محمد علي ��لمالكى), but I accidentally removed the PROD tag and then reverted my own edit. Then User:Liz re-removed the PROD tag in Special:Diff/1289174473, which I totally understand, but again I want to note that I de-prodded it in error.

The reason why I didn't want to de-PROD this right away was because I wanted to do a source search using both Arabic names which might take several days. I doubt we'll have time now that three other Olympian articles were nominated within minutes of this one (see 1 2 3), along with over 100 other recent PRODs that need to be dealt with. These mass-AfDs and PRODs have been controversial, because if you nominate articles with high enough frequency there are bound to be notable ones that fall through.

On the substance, the athlete was an Olympic Saudi Arabian sprinter that was likely covered in extant Saudi sources in the 1970s, but both those sources and coverage of the competitions he might have succeeded in, like the GCC Games, are not available to us easily. --Habst (talk) 01:26, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So now you're trying the line that this "has been controversial" to dissuade others, the village pump has been running for 2 months without an outcome. Plus still recycling the tired NEXIST argument that has been discounted in these athlete AfDs. LibStar (talk) 01:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LibStar, I have a lot of respect for your contributions and I hope you can show me the same respect. I would never "try lines" because I never say something in AfDs that I don't believe. Yes, the village pump discussion has been running for months without an outcome, which is why it is controversial. WP:N (which includes NEXIST) isn't tired in the same way that WP:V doesn't get tired – they are core P&G used in creating an encyclopedia. When has it ever been discounted? --Habst (talk) 01:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not having an outcome doesn't mean it's controversial. LibStar (talk) 02:26, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but in this case the reason there is no outcome yet is because there have been hundreds of comments both for and against, which is why the topic is controversial. I'm not even trying to say that there is community consensus against it right now – just that it is controversial, and it presents a problem. --Habst (talk) 02:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is not at all controversial compared to other users starting 50 AFDs on the same topic in one day, 50-100 concurrent prods, etc. And certainly it is still much less controversial than the creation of all the lousy articles. Geschichte (talk) 14:53, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Geschichte, I agree and appreciate your contributions. But neither of those other scenarios are currently happening, while this is a current issue. --Habst (talk) 14:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: there is an Obituary in Arabic from Alayam about him + plus the sources in the articles FuzzyMagma (talk) 09:43, 11 May 2025 (UTC) ops! Not the same person FuzzyMagma (talk) 13:41, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:58, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Question - FuzzyMagma, the source you've posted might just be SIGCOV of the subject of it, but the issue here is it doesn't say anything about the subject being a sprinter. Instead it only discusses his footballing career. How do we know this is the same person? The name is quite common as far as I can see. FOARP (talk) 11:22, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That is really a good question. Did some digging they actually are not the same person. Similar name country and era but completely different person. Sorry for that and thanks for the due diligence FuzzyMagma (talk) 13:42, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Also almost confused him with Mohammed Al-Malki (same era snd sport, different nationality) FuzzyMagma (talk) 13:46, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Society for Cultural Interaction in East Asia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable academic society. Lacks RSs and seems unlikely any would exist. Cabrils (talk) 03:23, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, Social science, and Asia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously deleted by WP:PROD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:55, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I found no indication of notability and can't find a suitable target for a merge/redirect. I considered whether the article could be rescoped to be about the Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia, but that doesn't seem to be notable either. MCE89 (talk) 13:46, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

California Cup Juvenile Fillies Stakes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable horse race with limited reliable sources. The only ones were data sheets from the race, no notable coverage in the press. DankPedia (talk) 03:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Horse racing, and California. DankPedia (talk) 03:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:34, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eleving Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NORG - no indication of WP:SUSTAINED notability supported by WP:RS. Amigao (talk) 03:17, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and google does not show sources

Czarking0 (talk) 03:29, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Latvia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:35, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hubert Corsi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

On the grounds of WP:RS and WP:N When I did my WP:BEFORE i could not find any reliable sources in English besides what was there, and a few unreliable sources in Italian DankPedia (talk) 03:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Italy. DankPedia (talk) 03:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete searched google and I agree the sources are not RS. Also searcher JSTOR, springer, and Duncker & Humblot and do not see anything relevant Czarking0 (talk) 03:35, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, easily passes WP:NPOL as a national deputy (for multiple legislatures). Cavarrone 04:42, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  As per WP:NPOL "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability"

  There are thousands of not notable politicians, Corsi included. DankPedia (talk) 04:49, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  DankPedia, you misunderstand the guideline. The section you cite explicitly states local official, meaning mayors, city councillors, etc.; Corsi is a member of the national parliament, not a local official. Rather, he falls under the first bullet point in the guidelinePoliticians [...] who have held [...] national [...] office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels (ellipses mine). Curbon7 (talk) 05:06, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Curbon7 the guideline also says "The following are PRESUMEDto be notable:"

  In most cases there is enough coverage to satisfy this presumption, but here, there is not. So if you don't want to go off of WP:N then WP:RS is also an issue with this article. DankPedia (talk) 05:09, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Let me clarify how NPOL works, because there is a subtext. National-level politicians are practically guaranteed to receive significant coverage by virtue of holding high office; this is because the actions they do in office (voting, speeches, etc.) are always going to be covered by media, even if that coverage cannot be found easily on the Internet (WP:OFFLINE). Thus, the main question isn't "Is he notable?", but rather "Is there enough to sustain an article beyond a one sentence sub-stub?" (which is the gist of WP:NOPAGE#3). Curbon7 (talk) 05:32, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The benefits of having an article here with only primary sources don't do much, as a person can easily find more information with just a simple google search.

  In terms of offline material, if you don't want the page to be deleted, please find those sources and cite them here. DankPedia (talk) 05:36, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Expanding on this by saying that if there were new sources that were found to provide more information about this person, then it can deserve its own article.

  For now it could just be added to a list of Italian politicians. DankPedia (talk) 05:37, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: First, the subject clearly meets WP:NPOL as an MP ([52]), so we should be assessing this on WP:NOPAGE grounds rather than notability; that is to say, the subject is notable, but is there enough content to warrant a standalone article. A look at his article on it.wiki shows two pages of his two parliamentary terms ([53][54]) which can be used for some details of his tenure like committees and such, in addition to his main parliamentary page linked before. Additionally, a look at GBooks showed this question he gave in parliament which can be used as a supplemental source. I think these two books ([55][56]) have further supplemental information, but I cannot see them in the GBooks preview; I imagine WP:RX can help here. Italian newspaper archives may also be of help, is there a main database to check? Curbon7 (talk) 05:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Also noting that his name is given as both the Italian "Umberto Corsi" and the Anglicized "Hubert Corsi". Curbon7 (talk) 05:02, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Curbon7 If you don't want to delete it, expand it.

  All the article says is "Umberto 'Hubert' Corsi (born 30 October 1938) is an Italian politician who served as a Deputy (1983–1994) and mayor of Monte Argentario (1985–1990, 1991–1995)."

  That is it. DankPedia (talk) 05:10, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That is not a requirement; see WP:NEXIST. Curbon7 (talk) 05:15, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Fair. Though when I was doing my WP:BEFORE I could not find any reliable sources, hence the short article.

  Additionally, both of the sources that were added are WP:PRIMARY (both were published by the Government of Italy on their websites) DankPedia (talk) 05:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  As it says in WP:NEXIST, articles that could have multiple sources can be kept. For this article, there are no WP:RS and all the sources are WP:PRIMARY DankPedia (talk) 05:32, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Curbon7You said "A look at his article on it.wiki shows two pages of his two parliamentary terms ([2][3]) which can be used for some details of his tenure like committees and such, in addition to his main parliamentary page linked before"

  If you truly believe there are more sources that are yet to be found, please put those into the article. DankPedia (talk) 05:29, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Wikipedia:Don't bludgeon the process. Cavarrone 05:46, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as per @Curbon7:, there is nothing I have to add that they haven't already brought up. I understand that this article is really small but from my understanding it shouldn't be removed. Dr vulpes (Talk) 05:17, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Dr vulpes I believe this article4 was nominated for speedy deletion under A1. It still has not met that requirement. All the article says is that the guy is a politician who served as a deputy and mayor. That isn't sufficient information for an encyclopedia article, as per WP:NOT. This work should not be a list of every politician who ever existed. DankPedia (talk) 05:22, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Yeah and a deputy in the Chamber of Deputies (Italy) would count since the Chamber of Deputies is the lower house of the bicameral Italian Parliament. Dr vulpes (Talk) 05:26, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Erasmus bus crash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability. Fails WP:EVENT. Unable to find any secondary coverage, only initial news reports and then the follow up news report when the driver died. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 22:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Spain. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 22:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep There's been sustained coverage in reliable sources in late 2016 [57], 2017 [58], 2018 [59], 2019 [60], 2021 [61], 2023 [62][63][64][65]. MarioGom (talk) 17:26, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  2016 is breaking news about closing the case, 2017 and 2018 are breaking news about reopening the case, 2019 is breaking news about reclosing the case, 2021 is breaking news about a memorial (but also has significant coverage of the crash itself), the 2023 sources are about the driver's death and the subsequent end of the case, and 2021 (which you listed as 2023) is breaking news about a memorial. The 2021 source is promising, but I'd hope for at least one source that actually demonstrated that it's notable in its own right as opposed to contemporary coverage over a long period of time. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 02:52, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The one in 2021 provides non-breaking news in-depth coverage, as you already noticed, and that is sustained coverage:

  • Costantini, Luca (19 March 2021). "El 'caso Freginals', cinco años de parálisis judicial y con los familiares indignados". Vozpópuli (in Spanish).

  The forensic analysis of the case has been published in the Spanish legal medicine journal, which is effectively a primary source, but also an indication of it not being a routine event:

  • Cabús, Rosa Maria (2023). "Intervención forense en el accidente de autobús con 13 víctimas mortales en Freginals, Tarragona, España". Revista Española de Medicina Legal (in Spanish). 49 (2): 71–78. doi:10.1016/j.reml.2023.03.001.

  MarioGom (talk) 10:17, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Multiple WP:RS found.Sigma World (talk) 20:17, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I don't think this single event merits its own page. Does not have WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE, it has follow ups on opening/closing of case, but I don't think they establsih notability of the event. Which makes me think it is also not that notable. Based on WP:EVENTCRITERIA, seems to fall under routine news. Ramos1990 (talk) 05:01, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A specific analysis of available sources would be very helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep international coverage over several years by reliable sources

Czarking0 (talk) 03:42, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OneMiners (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NORG - no indication of WP:SUSTAINED notability backed up with WP:RS. Amigao (talk) 03:14, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Companies, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:35, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2022 Columbus Crew 2 season (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSEASONS, as this covers an individual season for a team in the third tier of the United States soccer league system. Its reliance on posts from the team's website and X/Twitter account reflect this lack of independent, reliable sources to establish the season as a uniquely notable subject for WP:GNG. Even winning the league championship only seemed to yield brief coverage from The Columbus Dispatch, reflecting low notability for this season as a distinct topic. ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬) 03:12, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬) 03:12, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the pages for the following three seasons because they suffer from the same sourcing issues reflecting a lack of notability. All three of these articles similarly rely on the club's X/Twitter account, website, or Massive Report podcast; MLS Next Pro league website; or the websites of other clubs within the league. As noted above, I have identified occasional mentions of the club by Ohio newspapers like The Columbus Dispatch, but it is so minimal in scope and frequency so as to only serve as the significant coverage supporting the club's article, not the notability of individual seasons:

2023 Columbus Crew 2 season (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

2024 Columbus Crew 2 season (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

2025 Columbus Crew 2 season (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:36, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all per WP:NSEASONS, clearly not top level, but the policy needs to be updated, it doesn't actually talk about reserve teams. Govvy (talk) 10:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Heart of Edna Leslie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I did my WP:BEFORE and found that it does not meet both WP:RS and WP:N. It is a silent film with almost no reliable sources, not worthy of Wikipedia DankPedia (talk) 19:02, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 14. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:08, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:36, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soldado De Papel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable song, not covered in any secondary sources.

The few mentions of a song by this title I could find were for a song by a completely separate band called Próceres de Mayo, not this David Bisbal song. ApexParagon (talk) 03:06, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Spain. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:37, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Premonición: The song doesn't seem to be notable, but the album has enough space for merging. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 11:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kin'unken (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I did my WP:BEFORE and am nominating it for deletion under the grounds of WP:N. It could barely find any sources in Japanese, and none in English. DankPedia (talk) 02:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Japan. DankPedia (talk) 02:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Pisgah, Indiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There's nothing there, and sources consistently characterize this as a post office. Mangoe (talk) 02:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:36, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep However it is not clear to me if this is legally recognized according to WP:GEOLAND which is what my argument is based on. Czarking0 (talk) 03:45, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please go read WP:GNIS. We have not taken listing in these official gazetteers for a long time, and in any case, GNIS in particular has proven to be vairly error-prone. Mangoe (talk) 10:25, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jackson Kreuser (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:BIO. Sources cited are several database entries, a paid publicity announcement, and a single local news announcement of a transfer. News search turns up a few mentions of his name in lists of players, but no in-depth coverage. — Moriwen (talk) 01:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Basketball, Minnesota, and North Dakota. — Moriwen (talk) 01:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Halocene (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

While this isn't a G4, the substance of the issues raised at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Halocene do not appear to have been addressed by this new draft and merger. Since the decision is two years old, a new consensus may be helpful. Bringing it here for discussion. Star Mississippi 01:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, Television, United States of America, and Arizona. Star Mississippi 01:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Saw this earlier but was going to let the dust settle a day prior to bringing to AfD. Page created despite draft being declined multiple times. Fails WP:NBAND and WP:GNG.--CNMall41 (talk) 04:46, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect back to The Masked Singer (Australian TV series)#Controversy (effectively endorsing the closure of the first AfD). Now that I've the energy to sit and do WP:BEFORE search, I've found mostly press releases or routine announcements, some of which are cited in the article itself. Many of the in-depth coverage in independent secondary sources are about the plagiarism accusations. I had done the merge because a patroller (?) found Halocene (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and requested a pageswap with the base page name. I thought it better to keep the extensive page history at plain old Halocene, especially since (band) only has my merge, the patroller's addition of a short description and hatnote, and the recreator's writing. (For transparency, nominator notified me about this AfD on my user talk.) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 06:35, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I absolutely agree with aggregating the history together in the event Halocene becomes notable and have no issue with any of your actions here @Rotideypoc41352. I also notified the creator of the new article so that you were both aware since the script "saw" the creator as the the one who created the article deleted in 2023. I'm guessing the history was somewhere as this is a remarkable first edit even assuming Rledder had been active as an IP before registering for easy creation. Star Mississippi 12:48, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect - Redirect with history in tact to The Masked Singer (Australian TV series)#Controversy. --Jax 0677 (talk) 12:38, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bidding stick newspapers (disambiguation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unnecessary dab page per WP:DABFOREIGN and WP:PARTIAL, and since the term "bidding stick" doesn't appear in any of the titles (at least not in English). CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:22, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Disambiguations and Norway. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:22, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I used "bidding stick" in the title because its a English wiki and they are different words/spelling for bidding sticks used. the most common is Budstikke. Budstikke is a name for several newspapers, and is also the word for bidding sticks. it is also mentioned in the bidding sticks section named "newspapers". article creators many times add something to the beginning as not to conflict with eachother like having "Budstikke" in the name JamesEMonroe (talk) 01:29, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

theres also Budstikken and bidstikka, both meaning bidding stick. JamesEMonroe (talk) 01:31, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think even that many articles can be confused with each other with this. not only do they have the same name in the title but the way some of them are separated is not absolute of what can be searched for. plus theres names that is one letter off for wp partial. even ignoring that theres serveral with Budstikke in the title @CycloneYoris JamesEMonroe (talk) 01:35, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know I may have added some that may or may not be appropriate afterwards but it should not poison with the others to doom

I fear that you haven't looked closely enough into the dab and how its connected. but mainly just the "bidding sticks" as a name JamesEMonroe (talk) 01:41, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• oh also importantly it is put in after the name at the very beginning of the paragraph of a lot of the articles saying "bidding sticks" for as a name for the news paper.

its just "bidding stick newspaper" wouldn't show up but "bidding stick" will

the ones that don't are likely incomplete and might need that added.

these include pages that are studs and I didn't make them nor the bidding sticks page nor the newspaper section where it is mentioned and talked about where it can be helpful. JamesEMonroe (talk) 01:47, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This page does multiple things

• clears up ambiguity between articles containing the same name: mostly "Budstikke", but theres also others like "Budstikken"
• some of these names are extremely close to each other and can easily be mistaken for each other, they are one letter different while the same word grammatically different or they contain the same word and have in the beginning somthing relating to the newspaper like, its location or author, some have it in its title however the Budstikke is likely the most remember part of the newspaper. the newspaper and subject wouldn't be called bla bla Budstikken, it would be Budstikken as often these are local papers and don't need to differentiate
• There's articles with the same title word Budstikke is a redirect to bidding stick, however it is the name of several newspapers (on its own should be enough to warrant it)
• Connect newspapers with the name Budstikke or similar name, these can be confused and you cant link all these possible ones in article linking without this, users can first hand see the ambiguity, and articles like it grouped with multiple of the same name or similar. this page is and can be linked on these articles to help with disambiguation. this can be used as a hatnote atop to lead to multiple articles with the same name or similar name. no other can do this and too many to add a hat note on top
• its the topic of the section newspapers of the bidding sticks section and could disrupt it
• it informs and educates users of it ambiguity and topic.
• I used bidding sticks to not be language specific and it can be more easily identified and associated in the bidding sticks section which many of these newspaper articles link to. there's also multiple languages, even with it primarily being Norwegian, not all use the same spelling.
• while not its purpose, its a collection of newspapers where "bidding sticks" is used as a name and its small enough for hat list to fit in a dob, and not be over huge, I extensively looked for each one

. however people researching might only have in there head that the newspaper they are after is named after that item in that way but might not know of how it would be in a title in Wikipedia

JamesEMonroe (talk) 02:26, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

it cant be a redirect as there's none with that exact name

there's no over encompassing to merge it with, this is the over encompassing page for these articles

its too small to be a list or information, and its primary function is to lead to articles, but i think ill be able to add info for it to meet article criteria if it means saving it, but I really think its better off as a dob

I gave reasons for its naming but a name change could be vaild.

its a unique situation I feel with the naming, and I hope people can see that JamesEMonroe (talk) 03:05, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• More can, and are added. there's many newspapers with this name of sorts, most don't have wiki pages or notable enough. but there are notable ones and ones on this wiki that I can link together with this, regardless if they are Norwegian. A name change could limit this which is what i fear and i think its interesting concept enough to see them all together, but its way better then deletion. Also I really don't see how WP:DABFOREIGN applies at all. JamesEMonroe (talk) 04:32, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:37, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep as per what I said, and how it doesn't break those. (if I am allowed to vote). if consensus says otherwise for it to be removed, then in some compacity save it. ie soft delete instead of delete or draftify or preferably something else. JamesEMonroe (talk) 05:37, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Clear delete for several reasons: The topic should be covered at Bidding stick#Newspapers and only there. It's unfortunately out of place and not valid as a disambiguation page. "Bidding stick newspapers" is not at all a valid encyclopedic topic, it's just a matter of unrelated newspapers sharing the same name. "Bidding stick newspaper" is an entirely novel concept based on one person's interpretation of names, and are never written about as a topic in e.g. a scholarly setting. PS. James E. Monroe, for the future please condense your AFD replies - your contribution above is hard to read, mostly due to being too long and having a non-uniform formatting, but also grammar mistakes which seem to stem from rushed writing. Geschichte (talk) 07:33, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hello, @Geschichte Thank you for your fast feedback to get consensus moving.

  as far as a "novel concept" by one person, I will do some research on the matter to give sources please give me atleast beginning of next week to provide them and source them. I will look into it, but I don't think it is true. it certainly wouldn't be me.

  Also I didn't create Bidding stick nor Biddingstick#Newspapers and I didn't create any of the newspapers wikipages

  (PE: no, I'm not saying I cant edit other wikis that I haven't made, in cause you thinking that)

  if you mean as a term, it can be morphed into anything, I am not creating a term or concept here (at least not my goal to), I am creating a DOB. if i pour blue paint on something like a box, is it not permissible to call it a blue box? The reasoning for the name of the dob is what I stated, the name could be decided by the wiki community of course. I connected two words which are true, together that are uncontroversial for the dob name like calling a box that is painted blue a blue box. (unimportant, but to state the intent as it seems to be misunderstood -these are rhetorical questions ~bad ones :p~). anyways you can suggest a better name.

  "it's just a matter of unrelated newspapers sharing the same name" isn't that still important to distinguish between them? since they are so close in naming. need for disambiguation

  Also do you have to suggest the full nuclear option for it then to draftify or userify, or even with another possibility? is there a particular reason?

  (bolding is meant to be relaxed and for readability not yelling)

  will be back with you, hope all is well ^^ JamesEMonroe (talk) 08:35, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the name and description is not the point and can be changed. the point is to link the articles into a cohesive place that are named in that manner. for disambiguation. No term, concept or original research is to be created as per dob guidelines. Sources have stated the trend of naming, as well as other wikipedia, but I am looking currently for more scholarly examples for you if needed. The point is to be a navigational tool for names that are enough for disambiguation need (see discussion). the short info and description is meant to help navigation and give some little information that trace back to the link Wikipedia's, some inferable liberities I gave myself for explanation but are up to be deleted. and I would like for it description to be more properly worded by another editer

If its to be covered at Bidding stick#Newspapers it wouldn't provide disambiguation value for these articles, and stay as a concise complete cohesive list. it wouldn't be known for edits to use to for disambiguation, which before I helped with some editors were trying to fix by cited one similar article but there's multiple. and if that's to be decided then a merge after fixes and/or redirect is more order. however remember what I said. Many people wouldn't know to associate the two either, or that there's other articles named similarly. Putting it in the article would be larger then the contents in the article already, it also would be likely for redirects to be broken as to debloat the article. without a proper redirect it would be confusing of why in the user mind its redirecting to an object. I thought about the idea of merging after the afd but thought it would be bad for the reasons above, where it wouldn't work out, and seen other dob pages where that could be in articles, but weren't. Deleting it would prevent me from accessing what was in it aswell. Also I might be inaccessible for 2 days also if you could wait before forming destructive consensus in my absence. I shouldn't even be talking now with my work, my apoligies. JamesEMonroe (talk) 09:50, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider not writing any further comments in this discussion. Your comments are getting so long-winded, about 9,000 characters, that it gets impossible for people to follow. Geschichte (talk) 11:26, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

_{sorry, just saw this. also having the editor open hides and overrides things.} JamesEMonroe (talk) 13:53, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

some links (what I have not what I am going to research but some of what I have). here is the Wiktionary: https://no.wiktionary.org/wiki/budstikke Wiktionary, and all the Wikipedia articles all point them to being different grammatical tenses of the word. I will try to cite something for this that's good but why do I need further justification then was given to them? if they said it why cant I. being different tenses I think that's enough for a connection. its grammatical changes by one letter

inter change of usage between and articles with a comprehensive analyses on them

• "Budstikke has been used as a name for newspapers and newsletters" source (non academic but still mentioned):https://sonsofnorway5.com/programs/cultural_corner.php

this shows more connection and it as a trend, plus all wiki articles that I find says that they are connected, many newspaper variants have the "(the padding stick)" right in the beginning

• https://wikidocumentaries-demo.wmcloud.org/Q2564702?language=en Bidding stick and Budstikke used together in description of intorduction and in descrition of images, many images inside some labled "budstikke"

Basically if I/it am wrong. you have a potientially large wiki investigate/clean up on your hands if i'm not mistaken. this would be a large

Extending far enough to getting everything to repeat what is said from Wikipedia like the toaster incident, ok thats exaggerated with the toaster but it does feel like it goes deep across wikimedia. websites that seemed to have copied wikipedia: https://muckrack.com/media-outlet/budstikka https://alchetron.com/Bidding-stick

https://www.srku.edu.in/read?s=Budstikka etc.

if this info is incorrect, everything says it, it a research nightmare.

• Yes "Bidding stick newspapers" doesn't seem to be labeled elsewhere especially since most info is not in english or cared about in the english speaking world. it is suggesting that Budstikke translates to Bidding stick

in English an dis the substitute ( accord to other wiki articles, Wiktionary). So I substituted it, since its an English wiki. it could be renamed Budstikke (newpapers) or (media) idk. would exclude not Norwegian newspapers though, maybe bidding stick (newspaper). it was to categories those traits.

• No I havent added information that cant be inferred outside of Wikipedia, and no I am not doing a "translation list" or my own research. Still my information may of inferred incorrectly or badly worded i'm only human (or assume knowledge).
• no you do not have to agree to my explanations or descriptions. neither any of the ones beyond the name similarities connections here or on the dob, this is a disambiguation issue. Also not every link or category I added for it. this also isnt saying that you should not agree or it shouldn't be added, just it doesn't necessarily have to be
• From information from wikipedia/wikimedia, (yet to get elsewhere) -> Yes(if Wikipedia is 100% correct outside my edits) Budstikke and Budstikka Budstikkian are of the same word and are recognized as such, nothing showing otherwise. example “Budstikka” is the definite singular form of the noun “budstikke” in modern Norwegian Bokmål. see wikinary,
• Budstikke is already a redirect to bidding stick in Wikipedia, but it is used in the name of newspapers we know and is many times labeled as such on respective wikis

Opinion (assuming): Since its essentially the same word, That has a one letter difference it is disambigious between them especially when they are different newpapers. some also had previously a different grammatical form of bidding stick with their title. their name grammar form when being refer to outside the title could differ leading to ambiguity.

its seems like "the bidding stick form" might be how some are referred to as. it does make sense though for Budstikke. these are often local papers and seeming dont have another newspaper with the same kind of name for their respective area.

Reguardless of everything, purely on a name bases with Budstikke containing titles should have disambiguation fixes

Re: Also I might be inaccessible for 2 days also if you could wait before forming destructive consensus in my absence. I shouldn't even be talking now with my work, my apologies. (I had to add) [Sorry for long, I right long regardless of mental state and not meant be disruptive like mad edit warriors or argumentative, I like to spill out my ideas straight from my head, its just how I am, many times that turns into many errors :p.] JamesEMonroe (talk) 13:14, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment as it stands, the article is stuck half way between being an article and a dab. Probably the best approach is to merge any factual information about the origin of the term to Bidding stick#Newspapers, and cut this dab page down to a simple list of blue-links of the Norwegian newspapers with no additional text. The reason is that a dab page is only there to help readers find the right article when there are several with similar names. A reasonable analogy can be found at The_Times_(disambiguation), which doesn't discuss why newspapers get called "Times" but does list an awful lot of newspapers that a reader might conceivably be looking for. Elemimele (talk) 11:56, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I agree.

  for it being an article would be a big undertaking, technically the stubs are of mostly little substance that most linked articles could actually be merged, Though 1 or two might be of more importance and notability. but certainly some of them are questionable for notability and content amount. but it would help with size and difficulty to research. I think is could find info on why articles where made and how the trend started. having it as an article does reduce its capacity a bit to quickly see its ambiguity. Theres is information with this that could be explored that cant be with a dob too. Article though runs the risk entire newspapers (or links to them) being deleted for conciseness that dob doesn't have.

  for dob, I don't see why the other links couldn't be showed that aren't under the Norwegian section. I'm not saying keep the sections how they are, but the accessibility of the links in some capacity on the page.

  I agree that it does need to be cut down information wise and simplified, keeping its name help how its sourced like in bidding stick article. I think dates and location helps to show they are infact different though for text by link, but it doesn't require alot (plus it might lead them to hat they are looking for because there are mostly local newspapers

  I don't know if past names should be shown though also

  Keeping the name does help in a lot of ways and doesn't isolate it to being Norwegian. it could be changed to bidding stick (newpapers) and bidding stick (tool) or something.

  A simple list helps to quickly differentiate and compare, and see the ambiguity (and page purpose) right away JamesEMonroe (talk) 13:47, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. First, even if disambiguation is warranted, this is a bad title. The title implies that there is a primary topic for Bidding stick newspapers, which there is not. And even then, none of the entries would be ambiguous with the plural form in any case. And it is unclear whether any of the newspapers are commonly known in English by the translated titles. There might possibly be a case for a disambiguation page at Budstikke or Budstikke (disambiguation), but the present title is not appropriate at all. The suggestion to merge this content into Bidding stick#Newspapers should also be considered. older ≠ wiser 12:07, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I Agree. Although I don't see it as to much of an issue personally of bidding sticks being as a title relating to it even though it isn't used. maybe Bidding Stick (newspaper). Budstikke (disambiguation) could work as there is only one article that isnt apart of Budstikke, though as I said it doesn't allow room for its usage in other Scandinavian countries and norway centric and less referenceable, for its usage of bidding stick. but even with that it might be fine JamesEMonroe (talk) 13:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aron Reisz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:GNG; I did some searching and was not able to find significant coverage in any reliable source Joeykai (talk) 01:20, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Ice hockey, Hungary, and Romania. Joeykai (talk) 01:20, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abdi Awad Ali (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

He gets a lot of mentions, but I can't find any significant coverage of him in independent, reliable sources. The current sourcing barely mentions him at all. Fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:07, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Somalia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:44, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep Haji Abdi Awad is one of the most well-known entrepreneurs in Somaliland. All sources I've cited adequately mention him and cover the article's content. If any reference is problematic please point it out so we can take a look.

  One thing to note when it comes to Somali-related articles is nicknames and transliteration, which makes it a bit difficult to find significant coverage if you're not familiar. 𐒈𐒚𐒐𐒆𐒛𐒒 Gebagebo (talk) 23:26, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment I see this non RS source but maybe it is useful to others to find better sources? I may also help if an arabic speaker can check al-manhal WP:TWL. Another passing mention in an RS here Czarking0 (talk) 15:25, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: one more time....
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:10, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fourteen Days' War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Note tag. Supposed to be historical fact but can't verify it as no page numbers. No indication of significance. Unable to verify it in gbooks, refseek, internet archive. Fails WP:GNG. scope_creep^Talk 08:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Malaysia. Shellwood (talk) 10:21, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I somewhat agree with the deletion. The event however do exist but the source for it is very lacking and the original article mostly just anti communist fantasy. I've edited it to make it more neutral but still, proper academic source such as university research is hard to find. Dauzlee (talk) 03:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dauzlee: That is the core of it. Normally I wouldnt' sent such an article to Afd. In fact I don't think I've done that before and probably wont do it again. I spent close 4 hours back and forward while I was working in the garden on Sunday and couldn't find a thing on it of worth. I must have looked at it about 8 times and couldnt determine if it was valid or not. I don't think it was a war, more like a massacre or an action but either way I could verify it. I searched for an alternate name perhaps from the opposing side and couldn't find anything there either. scope_creep^Talk 04:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I think that if this is hard to find coverage for, then it may better to find a page to merge or redirect rather than delete. Ramos1990 (talk) 00:57, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DYRG (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Procedural AfD following WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 5#DYRG. Duckmather (talk) 00:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Philippines. Duckmather (talk) 00:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed Ould Khayar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod. The only third party source added was this, which is a small 1 line mention. Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT or WP:NOLY. LibStar (talk) 00:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Africa. LibStar (talk) 00:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination -Samoht27 (talk) 03:57, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no SIGCOV, fails WP:NSPORTS. I've also got to point out that this use of passing mentions to pad out a BLP article is dangerous: is there any evidence at all that the subject of this article is the Khayar who is Conseiller Chargé de la Communication Institutionnelle in the Mauritanian government, and not someone who just happens to have the same name? No, right? FOARP (talk) 13:20, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I agree that the primature.gov.mr source is a namesake added by another editor. Part of what makes this case so difficult is there are lots of namesakes of this subject making it harder to filter through search results. --Habst (talk) 13:24, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, I updated the article with a few more sources. What we know about this subject goes far beyond the usual Olympian stub, because we have documented an international career spanning several years and three global championships. Subject was the only Mauritanian representative at the inaugural World U20 Championships and also their only 1987 senior World Championships competitor, not even counting his Olympic qualification. These accomplishments are sure to have been covered in Mauritanian newspapers at the time, but we have no access to their 1980s daily archives yet as of 2025. This is important because we need to find SIGCOV to satisfy WP:SPORTCRIT. On Wikipedia, notability is always determined by the existence of sourcing, and never by the state of sourcing in an article.

I'll also say that there are many namesakes of this person, and I think the primature.gov.mr source added by another editor is not about a namesake and not the subject, but I appreciate the effort and think we should continue the search. --Habst (talk) 13:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"These accomplishments are sure to have been covered in Mauritanian newspapers at the time, but we have no access to their 1980s daily archives yet as of 2025"

Please tell us which Mauritanian newspapers existed in 1988, which are archived, and which you can show would be expected to have covered the Olympics?

Because as far as I can work out, the only national Mauritanian newspapers that existed at that time, when Mauritania was a military dictatorship with strictly-censored and controlled media, were the government outlets Horizon, and Chaab. As far as I can see, neither covered the most recent Olympics before they closed down, so I do not see why we should assume they would have covered the events you describe in any detail.

And again, repeating this misinterpretation of WP:NEXIST is bludgeoning. FOARP (talk) 13:37, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@FOARP, the newspapers don't have to have online archives for us to consider their coverage. New newspapers are added to online collections like WP:Newspapers.com every year, and per our discussion about Camil Doua earlier, coverage can also come from other countries for Mauritanian competitors and modern Mauritanian competitors have been found to have SIGCOV without exception, so it extends that the same would apply to their 1980s and 1990s athletes from a country that has historically been under-served by Wikipedia. I agree that bludgeoning is a major issue, and making one !vote in an AfD based on P&G, without responding to anyone else's !votes, isn't an example of that. --Habst (talk) 14:03, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - lacks SIGCOV in independent reliable secondary sources. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:14, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]